luckyykid
Regular Member
I realize this may catch me some heated responses, but i'm really curious as to people's thoughts on this. I've seen a couple posts here regarding the belief that LEOs cannot legally demand an OCer to show their permit. In the Wethersfield PD memo regarding OC, it says at the bottom that officers can require one show their permit if OCing. I spent a few hours searching the net for case law that supports or denies such a requirement, but i couldn't come up with anything.
The LEO side of me agrees with the notion that police ought to be able to require that someone open carrying show a permit. After all, the law says that someone may carry as long as they have a permit, so how is a LEO supposed to be able to determine if they are in compliance with that law without asking for a permit? I understand that there are people on the board who strongly disagree with this and would refuse to show a permit upon request. From what I gather from the forum the understanding is that LEO cannot demand a permit, and if such demand is not complied with, LEOs have no grounds to arrest for interfering.
The problem is, if LEOs are not allowed to require proof of permit, LEOs are forced to assume that someone open carrying is permitted. As you can imagine, we don't really go on assumptions in LE, but proof (like assuming a car is registered, or proving it by showing the registration.)
Like i've said elsewhere on the forum, I work as a LEO in a large inner-city environment where there is drug and gang activity. Gunshots are fired literally every day somewhere in the city (not always resulting in a person struck), and we had somewhere in the ballpark of 150 persons shot last year (non-fatal.) Obviously we had double-digit fatalities too from gun violence. So gun violence is definately a problem for us and the public we serve. Now hypothetically speaking, lets say that the gang members in the city catch wind of the open carry law, and that LEOs can't ask to see a permit. So they start open carrying their illegal stolen guns, and we as LEOs are just supposed to ignore it and assume they have a permit? That's the part I can't wrap my brain around.
I think some people on this forum limit their viewpoint on this from the side of "i'm a law abiding citizen exercising my right, and LEOs have no right to check my statuts", but step back for a moment and look at it from a LEOs perspective. LEOs are not supposed to profile, but for one having that viewpoint, you are forcing LEOs to size up a person OCing by looking at the way they are dressed, how they walk/carry themselves, how their hair is cut, and what they are driving, and make a snap judgement of either A) law abiding citizen, or B) potentially dangerous person.
So, what are your thoughts on this law enforcement dilemma?
Also, is anyone aware of any documentation/case law that specifically addresses whether or not a LEO can demand a permit? Or, are you aware of any case where a LEO demanded a permit of an OCer, aside from any other crime occuring, and refusal resulted in an interfering arrest? Is anyone aware of documentation specifying that a LEO cannot require/demand proof of permit?
And before anyone slays me on a personal level, please rememeber that I support the 2nd Amd and open carry for permittees. However, I wouldn't be a very good cop if I didn't have an interest in protecting the public from gun-toting thugs who collectively commit numerous homicides every year in CT.
The LEO side of me agrees with the notion that police ought to be able to require that someone open carrying show a permit. After all, the law says that someone may carry as long as they have a permit, so how is a LEO supposed to be able to determine if they are in compliance with that law without asking for a permit? I understand that there are people on the board who strongly disagree with this and would refuse to show a permit upon request. From what I gather from the forum the understanding is that LEO cannot demand a permit, and if such demand is not complied with, LEOs have no grounds to arrest for interfering.
The problem is, if LEOs are not allowed to require proof of permit, LEOs are forced to assume that someone open carrying is permitted. As you can imagine, we don't really go on assumptions in LE, but proof (like assuming a car is registered, or proving it by showing the registration.)
Like i've said elsewhere on the forum, I work as a LEO in a large inner-city environment where there is drug and gang activity. Gunshots are fired literally every day somewhere in the city (not always resulting in a person struck), and we had somewhere in the ballpark of 150 persons shot last year (non-fatal.) Obviously we had double-digit fatalities too from gun violence. So gun violence is definately a problem for us and the public we serve. Now hypothetically speaking, lets say that the gang members in the city catch wind of the open carry law, and that LEOs can't ask to see a permit. So they start open carrying their illegal stolen guns, and we as LEOs are just supposed to ignore it and assume they have a permit? That's the part I can't wrap my brain around.
I think some people on this forum limit their viewpoint on this from the side of "i'm a law abiding citizen exercising my right, and LEOs have no right to check my statuts", but step back for a moment and look at it from a LEOs perspective. LEOs are not supposed to profile, but for one having that viewpoint, you are forcing LEOs to size up a person OCing by looking at the way they are dressed, how they walk/carry themselves, how their hair is cut, and what they are driving, and make a snap judgement of either A) law abiding citizen, or B) potentially dangerous person.
So, what are your thoughts on this law enforcement dilemma?
Also, is anyone aware of any documentation/case law that specifically addresses whether or not a LEO can demand a permit? Or, are you aware of any case where a LEO demanded a permit of an OCer, aside from any other crime occuring, and refusal resulted in an interfering arrest? Is anyone aware of documentation specifying that a LEO cannot require/demand proof of permit?
And before anyone slays me on a personal level, please rememeber that I support the 2nd Amd and open carry for permittees. However, I wouldn't be a very good cop if I didn't have an interest in protecting the public from gun-toting thugs who collectively commit numerous homicides every year in CT.